No. A retained coherent copy creates snoop-participation and permission obligations that the old no-cache requester did not have. Revisit the interface and software contract.

Common trap: Giving a generic fix without identifying the boundary and unmet obligation in this example.

Independent data used by different agents occupies one coherence granule, so writes can transfer ownership or invalidate another agent's copy even though the variables are not logically shared. Confirm it with line-addressed traffic and ownership evidence. Possible repairs include separating or aligning frequently written fields, partitioning ownership, batching updates or changing access patterns; padding can help but increases footprint and is not automatically the best fix.

Common trap: Fixing with a faster NoC only.